MRandall25 wrote:You guys realize it's what they'll be starting the season with, not necessarily what they'll be ending with, right?

Yes...but they also felt as if this exact same group of D were good enough to win them a Cup last postseason. They went into the playoffs knowing Lovejoy and Engelland were going to have to play. They didnt add any Dmen at the deadline when it appeared obvious to everyone that they needed to.

The U wrote:Yes...but they also felt as if this exact same group of D were good enough to win them a Cup last postseason. They went into the playoffs knowing Lovejoy and Engelland were going to have to play. They didnt add any Dmen at the deadline when it appeared obvious to everyone that they needed to.

Its not like were a bunch of teams falling over themselves to trade top 4 D.

I can't imagine there are many teams out there with a surplus of top 4 D men that are willing to trade with what the pens have to offer. With that in mind, we should all feel pretty lucky that Niskanen has figured into the plan as he as so far.

MRandall25 wrote:You guys realize it's what they'll be starting the season with, not necessarily what they'll be ending with, right?

Yes...but they also felt as if this exact same group of D were good enough to win them a Cup last postseason. They went into the playoffs knowing Lovejoy and Engelland were going to have to play. They didnt add any Dmen at the deadline when it appeared obvious to everyone that they needed to.

The Penguins were on a 12 game winning streak going through the deadline. At the deadline, it was not obvious to everyone that they needed to add D-men. There were those of us that thought the defense was inadequate, but the team simply got cold at the wrong time going into the playoffs...also what some of us were predicting as the streak progressed. The team isn't good enough to win it all as currently constructed, but it wasn't "obvious to everyone" that they needed to add at the deadline last year.

MRandall25 wrote:You guys realize it's what they'll be starting the season with, not necessarily what they'll be ending with, right?

Yes...but they also felt as if this exact same group of D were good enough to win them a Cup last postseason. They went into the playoffs knowing Lovejoy and Engelland were going to have to play. They didnt add any Dmen at the deadline when it appeared obvious to everyone that they needed to.

The Penguins were on a 12 game winning streak going through the deadline. At the deadline, it was not obvious to everyone that they needed to add D-men. There were those of us that thought the defense was inadequate, but the team simply got cold at the wrong time going into the playoffs...also what some of us were predicting as the streak progressed. The team isn't good enough to win it all as currently constructed, but it wasn't "obvious to everyone" that they needed to add at the deadline last year.

It definitely wasnt obvious to everyone, its funny how the season progressed. Everyone points to the win streak as proof of something, but the win streak was in large part due to Fleury playing out of his mind. Fast forward we blame Fleury for the playoff loss. If that is the case it points to our overall defense as the issue.

My point is, it was pretty obvious throughout the year, even the win streak we would have a hard time in the playoffs. Like football, it was like teams had "ball control". The biggest turning point I saw was when teams decided to play less passive against us.

They realized to go quick break out and skate or long cross passes against us. We had no answers down the stretch even the games we won. In the playoffs it was magnified because we played the same team over and over again. They made constant adjustments to ours (like when we stopped the long break out pass they started chipping it out wide off the glass). Eventually Disco Dan ran out of answers and to me that points to talent and mostly why Philly would get stronger once the game progressed.

I agree I doubt these will be our pairings come April 15th, but I also am not sure how many defensive players are available at the deadline. With our chips (very young prospects) we are looking at trading with the 4 or 5 teams way out of the playoffs, and its going to have to be an impeding UFA or close. The Kings won as an 8th seed last year, the league is more even in a sense. The top 20 teams at the deadline are probably not going to be looking to dump, especially since most are going to want that playoff ticket money.

Does anyone not see starting with 8 defensemen considering anyone we waive will get claimed, even Lovejoy, and we are super thin up front and barely have 12 NHL forwards as it is (but those 12 are all more than solid).

13-8-2 for the team makeup. Full roster until Shero sees what we and other teams need and cap space is fine.

1) Boy, we think highly of our fringe prospects...2) We have a ton of them.3) If they aren't part of the plan, who cares if they get claimed?

The thing about #3 is that there is literally no forward depth that we can keep up here. Tangradi and Bennett are both better served playing a bigger role in WB/S than watching from the press box. So there are virtually zero options for depth at forward.

1) Boy, we think highly of our fringe prospects...2) We have a ton of them.3) If they aren't part of the plan, who cares if they get claimed?

The thing about #3 is that there is literally no forward depth that we can keep up here. Tangradi and Bennett are both better served playing a bigger role in WB/S than watching from the press box. So there are virtually zero options for depth at forward.

For the record, I think we probably will carry 8. And use Lovejoy or Engelland as a spare winger if we need one. But, I think we'd be free to waive these guys without recourse really. Claimed or not, it's just not a big concern, short term or long.

1) Boy, we think highly of our fringe prospects...2) We have a ton of them.3) If they aren't part of the plan, who cares if they get claimed?

The thing about #3 is that there is literally no forward depth that we can keep up here. Tangradi and Bennett are both better served playing a bigger role in WB/S than watching from the press box. So there are virtually zero options for depth at forward.

For the record, I think we probably will carry 8. And use Lovejoy or Engelland as a spare winger if we need one. But, I think we'd be free to waive these guys without recourse really. Claimed or not, it's just not a big concern, short term or long.

Agreed that they are not going to change the course of the franchise if they were to get claimed. I just think the organizational depth at both positions (or lack thereof) forces them to keep 8 like you said.

thepittman wrote:We have a good D-core, that Flyers series was a fluke

Sure hope you're right, but I just don't see it. Besides the flyer nonsense, our D was horrible the last month of the season. I still think this season's success will be determined by our D and goal tending. To me, the offense is more than adequate.

Asset management is a critical aspect of a GM's role. This is the single biggest reason that I've not been in favor of Shero's defensemen drafting philosophy...it creates a logjam in the development pipeline, and that is going to force us to lose assets for little/nothing.

However, if a couple of those d were forwards, we'd be stoked at our depth and future prospects.